Chamber
Plenary, 20 Mar 2008
20 Mar 2008 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Marine Environment
The marine bill debate raises a number of issues, including the need for enhanced environmental protection that respects the rich diversity of our marine life; the need to protect local workers and economies from heavy-handed and intrusive legislation that threatens their livelihoods; and the need for us to respect the communities that a marine bill will affect. I remain optimistic that we can craft legislation that respects those diverse interests. The example of our two national parks is helpful in that regard.
I was sceptical at first. I worried that the national parks would stifle development and be detrimental to our local communities. The national park boards are not perfect, and questions over planning issues still need to be resolved, but, in general, planning controls have been applied in such a way as not to threaten the diverse interests in and around the national parks. That should give us all confidence that a marine bill can achieve the same balance between economic use of the seas and protection of our marine environment. The success of the national parks is in no small measure due to the locally elected elements on the boards—there is a strong case for having wholly elected boards. In that respect, I cannot emphasise enough the importance of taking local communities with us in developing the marine bill.
The potential benefits of a consolidated marine bill are clear, but at the top of the list must be simpler rules and regulations for the benefit of all, and a stronger, more sustainable marine environment to hand on to future generations. I am confident that, with appropriate protections, the industries that share the waters—fishing, shipping, tourism, leisure, renewable energy, oil and gas—can remain rich and robust. I am hopeful that we will be able to get even more out of our seas than we do at present without detriment to them. It is essential that the bill does not place one interest above another. It would be remiss of us to save the fish while killing the local economy or to support the economy at the expense of our marine life.
Should the marine bill make provision for marine parks, it must not impose them on communities that do not want them. For instance, there is strong opposition to the imposition of a marine park on the west coast. Community interest must be the paramount consideration, because marine parks will work only where they are wanted. I was, therefore, interested to hear John Scott suggest that there is local support for such a park in the Solway Firth.
Local communities have a great deal at stake. More than 70 per cent of Scots live within 10km of the coast, and an estimated £4.5 billion in revenue is provided by marine activities on or immediately near our shores. We must, therefore, secure the support of our coastal communities for the proposed bill and show them that responsible legislation can provide a net benefit to them by supplementing instead of subtracting, protecting instead of pillaging, and building instead of breaking. In addressing our objectives for a marine bill, we must include safeguards for fishermen and others who rely on their trade to feed their families, as well as safeguards to protect our marine environment. There is no doubt that many people will be worried about the effects of a marine bill. We must reassure them not only that they will not be harmed, but that more work can and will be created.
Let us take the Highlands and Islands as an example. Highlands and Islands Enterprise estimates that 2,800 jobs are directly supported by sea fishing and that another 2,200 are indirectly linked. Many more people are employed in fish farming, tourism, sea angling and so on. Those are all important jobs that sustain our local communities, and we must build on them in a marine bill.
I was sceptical at first. I worried that the national parks would stifle development and be detrimental to our local communities. The national park boards are not perfect, and questions over planning issues still need to be resolved, but, in general, planning controls have been applied in such a way as not to threaten the diverse interests in and around the national parks. That should give us all confidence that a marine bill can achieve the same balance between economic use of the seas and protection of our marine environment. The success of the national parks is in no small measure due to the locally elected elements on the boards—there is a strong case for having wholly elected boards. In that respect, I cannot emphasise enough the importance of taking local communities with us in developing the marine bill.
The potential benefits of a consolidated marine bill are clear, but at the top of the list must be simpler rules and regulations for the benefit of all, and a stronger, more sustainable marine environment to hand on to future generations. I am confident that, with appropriate protections, the industries that share the waters—fishing, shipping, tourism, leisure, renewable energy, oil and gas—can remain rich and robust. I am hopeful that we will be able to get even more out of our seas than we do at present without detriment to them. It is essential that the bill does not place one interest above another. It would be remiss of us to save the fish while killing the local economy or to support the economy at the expense of our marine life.
Should the marine bill make provision for marine parks, it must not impose them on communities that do not want them. For instance, there is strong opposition to the imposition of a marine park on the west coast. Community interest must be the paramount consideration, because marine parks will work only where they are wanted. I was, therefore, interested to hear John Scott suggest that there is local support for such a park in the Solway Firth.
Local communities have a great deal at stake. More than 70 per cent of Scots live within 10km of the coast, and an estimated £4.5 billion in revenue is provided by marine activities on or immediately near our shores. We must, therefore, secure the support of our coastal communities for the proposed bill and show them that responsible legislation can provide a net benefit to them by supplementing instead of subtracting, protecting instead of pillaging, and building instead of breaking. In addressing our objectives for a marine bill, we must include safeguards for fishermen and others who rely on their trade to feed their families, as well as safeguards to protect our marine environment. There is no doubt that many people will be worried about the effects of a marine bill. We must reassure them not only that they will not be harmed, but that more work can and will be created.
Let us take the Highlands and Islands as an example. Highlands and Islands Enterprise estimates that 2,800 jobs are directly supported by sea fishing and that another 2,200 are indirectly linked. Many more people are employed in fish farming, tourism, sea angling and so on. Those are all important jobs that sustain our local communities, and we must build on them in a marine bill.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-1602, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on Scotland's marine environment.
The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):
SNP
The sea has defined and shaped Scotland and sustained our communities and nation since time immemorial. Our relationship with the sea has helped to forge our...
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab):
Lab
The bottom line, which came across strongly in the cabinet secretary's speech, is that we have had a lot of discussions to date. There has been a huge amount...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
Does the member agree that, in such a complicated scenario, which raises both devolved and reserved issues, it would be much better, simpler and more effecti...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
The marine management organisation is where we should sort that out. That is why I would like to get on to debating the bill, because the MMO will need to ha...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
It is crucial that coastal and marine-based activity is managed in a sustainable way that integrates socioeconomic and environmental factors for the long-ter...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
There is quite a range of UK bodies that have clear accountability to the Scottish Parliament. There are different models that we can use. Is Mike Rumbles su...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
No, I am not, despite SNP members tempting me to say that I am. I am suggesting that we should have devolved responsibility for planning in the marine spatia...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I was absolutely clear that we fully support all the AGMACS recommendations. We did not have to put that into the amendment because there are a lot of recomm...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
Sarah Boyack does not want to go down the same route as the Liberal Democrats. In this case, she is not as environmentally friendly as we are, and it is impo...
Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green):
Green
I am delighted that the marine environment is being discussed in the chamber. I will support Sarah Boyack's and Mike Rumbles's amendments, which are not mutu...
John Scott (Ayr) (Con):
Con
Today's debate on Scotland's marine environment is welcome and has been surprisingly consensual thus far, notwithstanding the best efforts of Mike Rumbles to...
Dave Thompson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
The marine bill debate raises a number of issues, including the need for enhanced environmental protection that respects the rich diversity of our marine lif...
Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
I appreciate the importance of caged fish farms. However, does the member agree that escapes, such as recently occurred in Loch Etive, can be detrimental to ...
Dave Thompson:
SNP
I agree that escapes from fish farms can be a serious problem. We must ensure that they are kept to a minimum.Marine parks could, however, bring many benefit...
Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
Like other members, I welcome this debate and hope that it allows ministers to accelerate the progress of what, in its attempt to rationalise all the institu...
Kenneth Gibson (Cunninghame North) (SNP):
SNP
I have a constituency that has extensive coastline and sizeable island and coastal communities, so I welcome this important debate on Scotland's marine envir...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
I support all that was said by my colleague Sarah Boyack and I support the amendment in her name.The first thing that hit me when I started to explore the is...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
At this stage of a debate, most of the arguments have usually been made. In this debate there has been consensus among members on the broad principles. There...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
My point was about expectations. The cabinet secretary said nine months ago that he would announce plans for a bill soon, and I wanted to urge him forward.
Rob Gibson:
SNP
I thank the member for his friendly intervention. My point is that the number of people that the Government can deploy on such issues is limited, so we shoul...
Robin Harper:
Green
Does Rob Gibson acknowledge the real difference between the amount of disruption that is caused by, for instance, an offshore wind farm close to or in the Mo...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
We have to sort out such issues. In order to achieve balance, we will have to put in place an organisation such as we are discussing. In the meantime, we wil...
Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab):
Lab
I disagree slightly with Kenneth Gibson's allegation that the previous Executive did absolutely nothing about our marine environment for about 96 months. I a...
Jamie Hepburn (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Members will need to forgive me if my voice crackles a little today. It comes from urging Partick Thistle on to its well-deserved draw at Ibrox last night. T...
Robin Harper:
Green
This has been an interesting and important debate. As I reflect on what has been said in relation to the UK position, I note that our SNP colleagues—quite ri...
Jim Hume (South of Scotland) (LD):
LD
The debate has highlighted our marine and coastal environment, which contains many special and some unique landscapes of national and international renown. A...
The Minister for Environment (Michael Russell):
SNP
Beam me up.
Jim Hume:
LD
I wish they would beam me up, Mr Russell.Liberal Democrats welcome any proposal for a marine national park, which was mentioned by Sarah Boyack and John Scot...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
Why will the Liberal Democrats vote against an amendment that seeks to speed up the process? That is exactly what the member is calling for.